4.5 Article

Dark tetrad and vulnerable dark triad traits: Identifying latent profiles from a person-centered approach

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2023.112499

关键词

Dark tetrad; Vulnerable dark triad; Psychopathy; Narcissism; Machiavellianism; Sadism; Borderline symptomatology; Latent class analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used Latent Class Analysis to investigate the combination of Dark Tetrad and Vulnerable Dark Triad traits, and identified four personality profiles: Low traits, Moderate Dark Tetrad, High Dark Tetrad, and Vulnerable Dark Triad. The study found differences in external variables among these profiles.
Dark Tetrad (D4; psychopathy, narcissism, Machiavellianism, sadism) and Vulnerable Dark Triad (VDT; borderline symptomatology, vulnerable narcissism, and Factor 2 psychopathy) traits share antagonistic tendencies, but also have distinct characteristics-the former presenting callous and unemotional traits, and the latter, emotionally vulnerable facets. The present study (N = 1651 community participants) aims to explore if the combination of D4 and VDT traits can yield meaningful personality profiles using Latent Class Analysis (LCA), and to compare these profiles on external variables, namely gender, age, PID-5-BF personality domains, ACME empathy dimensions, and BPAQ-SF aggression. The optimal LCA solution resulted in four profiles: Low traits (LT), Moderate Dark Tetrad (MDT), High Dark Tetrad (HDT), and Vulnerable Dark Triad (VDT). D4 profiles were distinguished by a continuum of severity, and qualitative differences were also observed on latent indicators leading to the identification of a VDT profile. Findings suggest that individuals from the HDT profile might be characterized by a cold relational approach with proneness to act aggressively, and to take pleasure in hurting others. The present study also provides further support for the VDT-characterized by negative emotionality, hostility, and feelings of envy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据